Community Chat

[occasionalrain]

On 8/6/2014 SydneyH said:

If the surrogate did not want to abide the contract, then I guess this was the best outcome for everyone.

I agree with you. The parents paid a woman to carry their pregnancy and decisions relating to that pregnancy should have belonged to the parents.

[Elstongunn]

On 8/6/2014 LipstickDiva said:

On 8/6/2014 ktlynam said:

On 8/6/2014 SydneyH said:

On 8/6/2014 sidsmom said:

I would NEVER be arrogant enough to judge anyone in this situation. Some can, some can't. Doesn't make it right or wrong.

Agreed, not everyone is equipped to parent a special needs child.

ITA.

The child also had heart problems and was looking at multiple surgeries over a period of years.

Their lives, their money, their contract, their decision.

I'd like to add, their lack of compassion and their lack of morals.

I just hope if something happens to either of them, someone has more compassion for them and doesn't toss them aside.

I don't think anyone has the right to judge anyone else on their level of compassion or morals. And as i mentioned in an earlier post, the Morality Train left the station decades ago.

As far as if something happens to either of them later in life? How many times have you heard or seen of elder people getting tossed into a nursing home and the reasons given by the people/children who put them there? "We can't afford to take care of their needs," "We don't have the schedule/time/equipment/space/emotional/physical strength, money...", etc., etc., etc. Do you question their morality or compassion?

It is their life, their family they want to build, their decision. Just as it is the decision of people to abort early, late, or not at all for any number of reasons.

[sophiamarie]

On 8/6/2014 occasional rain said:

On 8/6/2014 SydneyH said:

If the surrogate did not want to abide the contract, then I guess this was the best outcome for everyone.

I agree with you. The parents paid a woman to carry their pregnancy and decisions relating to that pregnancy should have belonged to the parents.

ITA - They were given the option to abort one twin and the Surrogate refused. She decided to keep him - and good for her. The parents did what they thought was best for them and good for them. Good for all concerned.......

[SydneyH]

On 8/6/2014 terrier3 said:

I respectfully disagree with you. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right. Most people do know right from wrong.

These parents are thankfully the exception...not the norm. Which is why their story made news.

You don't really know what percentage of people take different options. They had information beforehand that allowed them to make a decision about their children.

[occasionalrain]

On 8/6/2014 terrier3 said:

On 8/6/2014 ktlynam said:

On 8/6/2014 SydneyH said:

On 8/6/2014 sidsmom said:

I would NEVER be arrogant enough to judge anyone in this situation. Some can, some can't. Doesn't make it right or wrong.

Agreed, not everyone is equipped to parent a special needs child.

ITA.

The child also had heart problems and was looking at multiple surgeries over a period of years.

Their lives, their money, their contract, their decision.

Children aren't dogs or livestock...and women shouldn't be used as brood mares...especially women from poor countries.

It may be perfectly LEGAL, but that doesn't make it MORAL.

So a poor woman can make money that will improve her life and the life of her children by carrying the child for a couple but you think that's wrong. Better that the couple adopt and the poor woman stays poor.

People, everyday, do things they'd rather not do because the ends justify the means. People stay married to someone they dislike for financial reasons or because they think it's better for their children. People work at dangerous jobs, dirty jobs, put up with awful bosses because they need money to live.

I can think of a lot worse things than having a child for another.

[Lipstickdiva]

On 8/6/2014 ktlynam said:

I don't think anyone has the right to judge anyone else on their level of compassion or morals. And as i mentioned in an earlier post, the Morality Train left the station decades ago.

As far as if something happens to either of them later in life? How many times have you heard or seen of elder people getting tossed into a nursing home and the reasons given by the people/children who put them there? "We can't afford to take care of their needs," "We don't have the schedule/time/equipment/space/emotional/physical strength, money...", etc., etc., etc. Do you question their morality or compassion?

It is their life, their family they want to build, their decision. Just as it is the decision of people to abort early, late, or not at all for any number of reasons.

Well yeah I am judging them. I think they are horrible people.

Not everyone's morality train left the station decades ago.

[occasionalrain]

On 8/6/2014 ktlynam said:

On 8/6/2014 LipstickDiva said:

On 8/6/2014 ktlynam said:

On 8/6/2014 SydneyH said:

On 8/6/2014 sidsmom said:

I would NEVER be arrogant enough to judge anyone in this situation. Some can, some can't. Doesn't make it right or wrong.

Agreed, not everyone is equipped to parent a special needs child.

ITA.

The child also had heart problems and was looking at multiple surgeries over a period of years.

Their lives, their money, their contract, their decision.

I'd like to add, their lack of compassion and their lack of morals.

I just hope if something happens to either of them, someone has more compassion for them and doesn't toss them aside.

I don't think anyone has the right to judge anyone else on their level of compassion or morals. And as i mentioned in an earlier post, the Morality Train left the station decades ago.

As far as if something happens to either of them later in life? How many times have you heard or seen of elder people getting tossed into a nursing home and the reasons given by the people/children who put them there? "We can't afford to take care of their needs," "We don't have the schedule/time/equipment/space/emotional/physical strength, money...", etc., etc., etc. Do you question their morality or compassion?

It is their life, their family they want to build, their decision. Just as it is the decision of people to abort early, late, or not at all for any number of reasons.

Excellent post.

[NoelSeven]

On 8/6/2014 ktlynam said:

On 8/6/2014 terrier3 said:

On 8/6/2014 ktlynam said:

On 8/6/2014 SydneyH said:

On 8/6/2014 sidsmom said:

I would NEVER be arrogant enough to judge anyone in this situation. Some can, some can't. Doesn't make it right or wrong.

Agreed, not everyone is equipped to parent a special needs child.

ITA.

The child also had heart problems and was looking at multiple surgeries over a period of years.

Their lives, their money, their contract, their decision.

Children aren't dogs or livestock...and women shouldn't be used as brood mares...especially women from poor countries.

It may be perfectly LEGAL, but that doesn't make it MORAL.

Seriously, IMO, the Morality Train left the station decades ago. This is just the natural progression of decisions that were started a very long time ago.

IMO we're more moral than we used to be in many ways.

When I was a kid, spousal abuse was common and kept under the table. There was no help for women or children who were beaten. There was no anti-rape movement. You heard about kittens drowned in bags quite often. Laws discriminated against people of color.

People can't get away with any of that nowadays, and if they try, other people will come down on them.

[terrier3]

On 8/6/2014 LipstickDiva said:

On 8/6/2014 ktlynam said:

I don't think anyone has the right to judge anyone else on their level of compassion or morals. And as i mentioned in an earlier post, the Morality Train left the station decades ago.

As far as if something happens to either of them later in life? How many times have you heard or seen of elder people getting tossed into a nursing home and the reasons given by the people/children who put them there? "We can't afford to take care of their needs," "We don't have the schedule/time/equipment/space/emotional/physical strength, money...", etc., etc., etc. Do you question their morality or compassion?

It is their life, their family they want to build, their decision. Just as it is the decision of people to abort early, late, or not at all for any number of reasons.

Well yeah I am judging them. I think they are horrible people.

Not everyone's morality train left the station decades ago.

There are still right and wrong behaviors.

Selfish and unselfish too.

The bio dad and his wife are selfish. And people have the right to call them out on it...which is why it became a story in the news.

Thankfully most people and most parents to be are not like these two.

[Elstongunn]

On 8/6/2014 terrier3 said:

On 8/6/2014 ktlynam said:

On 8/6/2014 terrier3 said:

ITA.

The child also had heart problems and was looking at multiple surgeries over a period of years.

Their lives, their money, their contract, their decision.

Children aren't dogs or livestock...and women shouldn't be used as brood mares...especially women from poor countries.

It may be perfectly LEGAL, but that doesn't make it MORAL.

Seriously, IMO, the Morality Train left the station decades ago. This is just the natural progression of decisions that were started a very long time ago.

I respectfully disagree with you. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right. Most people do know right from wrong.

These parents are thankfully the exception...not the norm. Which is why their story made news.

I agree that just because something is legal doesn't make it right or ethical. But I really doubt there is one definition of what is moral that everyone will agree on. That appears to be a fuzzy concept for many.

These parents wanted to abort the child early on in the pregnancy once they learned of the Down's Syndrome diagnosis. The surrogate overrode their decision. She did not have that right, but she took it on herself and in doing so, she should take on the responsibility of raising the child.

Fetuses get aborted all of the time for a variety of reasons and it is generally accepted by society in the U.S. as legal and moral and a right of the parents to do that regardless of their reasons. In the U.S., no one gets to question a woman's right or reason for an abortion (legally)...only that they are available to her. The fact that THIS was made public doesn't change that right in the U.S.

I have no idea where you stand on abortion, but anyone who supports the right of abortion under any construct really doesn't have the right to get all morally outraged over this couple.